Once again I mark December 10, but never before have I felt such anxiety and, moreover, such certainty that the human rights situation in the world is deteriorating. And this is linked to fundamental reasons. Let us briefly outline them:
Russia’s attack on Ukraine, right in the heart of Europe and in violation of international agreements, has cast doubt on the entire post–World War II peacekeeping system — the UN, founded on the Rule of Law and the protection of human rights. This system had remained intact for 70 years.
And now it has been destroyed. This means that further violations of internationally recognized borders established after World War II can be expected — and therefore the emergence of a third world war in Europe, possibly with the use of nuclear weapons.
The United States — the acknowledged leader of the democratic world and the largest economy — guaranteed peace in Europe for all of these 70 years. But now, acting as arbiter in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the U.S., under President Trump, has taken a position that supports the aggressor, Russia, rather than the victim, Ukraine.
This is in contrast to the European Union, which has supported Ukraine from the very beginning of the conflict and continues to do so. This fundamental contradiction has weakened pressure on Russia, and in fact, Russia emerges from this military conflict as the victor.
This means that after a brief pause, Russia will most likely choose a new victim. This is because Putin can govern the country only by dragging Russia into new and ongoing military conflicts. And he has been doing so since he came to power in 2000. As soon as Russia returns to peaceful life, he is very likely to lose power.
This is happening because the UN failed and did not manage to stop Russia’s aggression in time — neither in Georgia nor in Ukraine — despite its mandate to maintain peace.
The UN has proven powerless and, making decisions by majority vote, has no way to affect an aggressor state if that state is a permanent member of the Security Council.
Let us present the results of the numerous votes in the UN General Assembly since 2014, when Russia invaded Crimea and Donbas.
Resolution 68/262 (2014) — on Crimea (before the full-scale invasion)
A/RES/68/262 — Crimea, March 27, 2014
— Reaffirms Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence, unity, and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders;
— Declares that the “referendum” in Crimea on 16.03.2014 has no legal validity and cannot serve as a basis for changing the status of Crimea and Sevastopol;
— Calls on states and organizations not to recognize any change in the status of Crimea.
Vote: in favor — 100, against — 11, abstentions — 58, not voting — 24.
The United States voted in favor.
Just like the UN, the United States voted to strongly condemn the annexation of Crimea by Russia.
From 2022 to 2025 — immediately after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — regular meetings of the 11th Emergency Special Session of the UN General Assembly (ES-11/1–ES-11/8) were held.
Let us examine the results.
First session — ES-11/1 (March 2, 2022)
ES-11/1 – “Aggression against Ukraine”
A/RES/ES-11/1 — March 2, 2022
— “Strongly condemns” Russia’s aggression against Ukraine;
— Demands the immediate, complete, and unconditional withdrawal of Russian armed forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders;
— Demands the revocation of the recognition of the “DPR” and “LPR.”
Vote: in favor — 141, against — 5 (Russia, Belarus, DPRK, Eritrea, Syria), abstentions — 35.
The United States voted in favor.
All subsequent votes up to February 3, 2023 — up to ES-11/6 — produced the same results condemning Russia and supporting Ukraine. The United States voted in favor each time.
During this entire period, the United States was led by President Biden, who supported all UN resolutions strongly condemning Russia.
The situation changed fundamentally when the new president, Trump, came to power.
At the ES-11/7 session, which discussed the conditions for ending the war, the General Assembly, as usual, voted for a strong resolution — but the United States under Trump voted against and pushed for a softer resolution, ES-11/8.
And it is precisely this resolution that became the basis for the peace treaty currently being discussed.
ES-11/7 — February 24, 2025
A/RES/ES-11/7 — “Advancing a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine”
— Reiterates the demand for the immediate, complete, and unconditional withdrawal of Russian forces;
— Emphasizes the need for accountability for the violations committed.
Vote: in favor — 93, against — 18 (including Russia and the United States), abstentions — 65, not voting — 17.
The United States voted against.
ES-11/8 — February 24, 2025
“The path to peace”
— Calls for the earliest possible end to the conflict;
— Contains significantly more neutral and softer wording;
— Russia’s aggression is described far less explicitly than in previous resolutions.
Vote: in favor — 93, against — 8, abstentions — 73, not voting — 19.
The United States voted in favor.
Summary of the votes
• President Obama in 2014 supported the strong Resolution 68/262, reaffirming Ukraine’s territorial integrity.
• President Biden unequivocally supported the resolutions condemning Russia (ES-11/1–ES-11/6).
• Until Trump came to power, the United States and the UN were united in their stance: condemnation of Russia’s aggression and attempts to stop it.
The resolutions of 2025 formed the basis for the future peace treaty:
— The first resolution, ES-11/7, named Russia as the aggressor, demanded troop withdrawal and compensation. The United States voted against it.
— At the initiative of the United States, a new vote was held, and Resolution ES-11/8 softened the wording: Russia was no longer directly named as the aggressor.
Based on this weakened resolution, the United States and Russia agreed on a draft peace plan that satisfies neither Ukraine nor Europe. The fate of the treaty remains uncertain, but it is already clear that it is written in the interest of the aggressor, not the victim.
At present, the following conclusion can be drawn:
The UN, created 70 years ago and which ensured stability in Europe, no longer fulfills its functions.
Our examples show that the permanent members of the Security Council, having privileges, can always block the results of the votes of the General Assembly. In this case, it is Russia.
Today we observe a trend in which, under Trump’s presidency, two permanent members — Russia and the United States — rely not on the Rule of Law but on the position of strength when dealing with international issues.
It is in exactly this manner — from a position of force — that the United States and Russia are trying to “push through” a peace treaty between Russia and Ukraine.
Lev Ponomaryov, President of the Andrei Sakharov Institute